House of Commons passes transgender rights bill

[SebC]

... with the Prime Minster and many other Conservatives voting against.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...d.html?cmp=rss

A bill that would make it illegal to discriminate against transgender Canadians was approved by the House of Commons today.

The Opposition private member's legislation passed Wednesday by a vote of 149-137, with the crucial support of 16 Conservatives, including four cabinet ministers.

It was one of the first tests of the Conservative caucus' resolve on lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender (LGBT) rights in Canada at a time when Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird has been mounting a strong defence of such rights abroad.

Baird, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Labour Minister Lisa Raitt and Heritage Minister James Moore were among the Conservatives who supported the bill. Prime Minister Stephen Harper, most of his front bench and the vast majority of his backbenchers opposed it.

Opposition parties were united in their support for the bill, sponsored by New Democrat Randall Garrison.

[Thor]

Its amazing how stupid the conservatives are because they can't get past this bill because of the "bathroom" question.

[kirant]

Are there any law experts willing to dissect the bill for us? It sounds like the reason against was lack of clarity. I'm not sure if that's just an excuse or not though (especially since the primary opposition were all Tories).

EDIT - Though...

Other Conservative MPs opposed the bill on other grounds, such as the argument that pedophiles would be protected when they lurked in public bathrooms.

WTF?

[TorqueDog]

What sort of disconnect from reality does one need to be enduring to think that a bill that protects the transgendered somehow provides cover for pedophiles?

[Cole436]

I can't see the Conservatives sticking past the next election.
Their leadership group is a bunch of social dinosaurs.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

I think that the Conservatives likely have a strong social conservative presence, especially in the grassroots that vote for them (an older generation) however realize that they need to become more modern to make inroads in Quebec and Ontario and thus have a small segment vote for the bill allowing it to pass. It makes political sense.

That being said I do understand that there would be some issues with it being institutes, for instance if someone was a pre-operational transgendered person which change room at the gym would they use? That being said I firmly believe that this is a bill that would have more positive meaningful benefits to all of society and am glad that it passed and didn't get bogged down in semantic arguments.

[peter12]

The YMCA near by place in Ottawa has a special change-room for couples, and trans-gendered people. Not a big deal. There is strong social stigma against people not supposed to be there.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

What sort of disconnect from reality does one need to be enduring to think that a bill that protects the transgendered somehow provides cover for pedophiles?

This goes to the long standing ridiculous notion that homosexuality is strongly tied to paedophilia. Something that has been long since refuted, and this belief being held by these morons still today just shows how wilfully ignorant and intolerant they are looking for reasons to justify their fear or justify their beliefs against these rights.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

I think that the Conservatives likely have a strong social conservative presence, especially in the grassroots that vote for them (an older generation) however realize that they need to become more modern to make inroads in Quebec and Ontario and thus have a small segment vote for the bill allowing it to pass. It makes political sense.

That being said I do understand that there would be some issues with it being institutes, for instance if someone was a pre-operational transgendered person which change room at the gym would they use? That being said I firmly believe that this is a bill that would have more positive meaningful benefits to all of society and am glad that it passed and didn't get bogged down in semantic arguments.

In all honesty, does it really matter? I suspect this is more a question for women, but as a male I wouldn't really care.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Thor

This goes to the long standing ridiculous notion that homosexuality is strongly tied to paedophilia. Something that has been long since refuted, and this belief being held by these morons still today just shows how wilfully ignorant and intolerant they are looking for reasons to justify their fear or justify their beliefs against these rights.

I don't really see what the issue is here. I mean, if a dude or chick is perverting out on a kids in a woman/man's washroom I don't see how having junk or not makes a lick of difference.

"Excuse me ma'am were you ogling that 8 year old girl".

"I sure was officer, but I have a vagina so we're all good".

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

In all honesty, does it really matter? I suspect this is more a question for women, but as a male I wouldn't really care.

Try walking into a female change room and tell them that you are actually a woman. If it was a female coming into a male change room I agree with you 100% that a lot of guys wouldn't mind.

The pedophile thing is just dumb though.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

Try walking into a female change room and tell them that you are actually a woman. If it was a female coming into a male change room I agree with you 100% that a lot of guys wouldn't mind.

The pedophile thing is just dumb though.

Ya, the more I think about it, I simply cannot imagine females being comfortable with a male in their change room. From what I understand they largely shower in stalls as it is.

[Weiser Wonder]

In the pacific northwest trans people are allowed to use the bathroom and locker room of their choosing and there are zero issues.

This whole debate is ridiculous anyway. Hormones are actually the primary controls of sex drive and muscle mass and trans people have the dominant hormone of their identified sex. So having a trans man who has the strength of a man and a high sex drive in the woman's room makes less sense than having a trans woman in the woman's room who has the muscles of a woman. That's if you accept the idea that sex segregated bathrooms make sense at all, which I'm not sure of.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

This whole debate is ridiculous anyway. Hormones are actually the primary controls of sex drive and muscle mass and trans people have the dominant hormone of their identified sex. So having a trans man who has the strength of a man and a high sex drive in the woman's room makes less sense than having a trans woman in the woman's room who has the muscles of a woman. That's if you accept the idea that sex segregated bathrooms make sense at all, which I'm not sure of.

Do you have any research for that because that wouldn't make sense as people wouldn't have to go on hormone therapy prior to their surgery, plus wouldn't females who were transgendered would look like the east german swim team?

[Weiser Wonder]

Hormone therapy is the dominant treatment for trans people. Every trans person has years of hormones before surgery. Surgery is expensive and hormone therapy is effective in treating the mental anguish of being trans. And how they look depends on when they transitioned. There are lots of women in Portland that transitioned in grade school or middle school so there's no way to tell. Trans men you can neve r tell since male characteristics are added on.

[Fire]

So it was legal to discriminate against transgendered people before this? I doubt it. Sounds like a lame attempt by the opposition to look good.

[GGG]

On the change room issue I would expect a transgendered person to use a stall to change in. Waving dink everywhere in a womens changeroom regardless of your gender is never appropriate.

As long as the person is dressed as the gender of the washroom they are using it is the most reasonable choice.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Fire

So it was legal to discriminate against transgendered people before this? I doubt it. Sounds like a lame attempt by the opposition to look good.

Did you read the article?

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal had supported adding transgender identity to federal anti-discrimination and anti-hate legislation, saying it would promote acceptance and send a message about tolerance.

While some MPs argued that the transgendered were already protected on the basis of sex and disability, the tribunal said it would be better to have explicit protection so that the question is not perpetually challenged.

(Wait, disability?)

[SebC]

Originally Posted by GGG

As long as the person is dressed as the gender of the washroom they are using it is the most reasonable choice.

That's very ... heteronormative.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by GGG

On the change room issue I would expect a transgendered person to use a stall to change in. Waving dink everywhere in a womens changeroom regardless of your gender is never appropriate.

As long as the person is dressed as the gender of the washroom they are using it is the most reasonable choice.

Yeah, because "waving dink" is something the average pre-operative transgendered person would do.